Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 10/31/01 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room-Eugene City Hall October 31, 2001 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Bonny Bettman, Pat Farr, Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Gary Pap~, Gary Rayor. Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. Mr. Lidz reported that the City Council had adopted a telecommunications ordinance imposing licensing and registration fees and that this action was challenged by four telecommunications companies to the State of Oregon Circuit Court. Mr. Lidz said that the trial judge ruled the ordinance was invalid and consequently that decision was appealed to the State Court of Appeals. Mr. Lidz was pleased to announce that the appeal had been reversed by the Court of Appeals with a remanded entry of judgment in favor of the City. He added, however, that this decision could be appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court as a petition for review. Ms. Nathanson requested a copy of Mr. Lidz's summary on this ruling to forward to the National League of Cities. Mr. Meisner requested a summary of the financial implications of the ruling. A. WORK SESSION: Parks and Open Space Bond Measure Ms. Riner presented a progress report on the $25.3 million Parks & Open Space (POS) Bond Measure. She explained that prior to the passage of the measure, the Mayor's Parks and Open Space Committee was formed and assigned the task of determining the components of the measure. Ms. Riner stated the following programs were approved and moved forward: · Develop regional and community-wide recreation facilities · Upgrade existing sports fields on school district properties · Develop new neighborhood parks/renovate existing neighborhood parks · Acquire land for future parks · Expand the Ridgeline Trail open space system Ms. Riner referred to a map which illustrated how the 53 projects were distributed throughout the neighborhoods. She provided a status of the projects as follows: · Community Regional Facilities - the largest component with a cost of $11,750,000/8 projects proposed, 11 to be completed, including: · Amazon Pool Renovation - largest single component at a cost of $4.4 million/highly successful first season; MINUTES-Work Session City Council October 31, 2001 Page 1 · Youth Sports Parks - largest partnership project with $4 million POS bond measure funds and $3.5 million School District 4J bond measure funds consisting of the following: three Youth Sports Parks with uses for all ages including walkways, picnic facilities, community gardens, benches, lighting, skate parks, four multi-purpose all-weather synthetic surface fields; · Bethel Park, constructed with Bambino Babe Ruth; future construction includes a skate park and restroom facilities; · A master plan to determine priorities will be developed for Skinner Butte Park with public workshops and community surveys underway; a proposal for a historic agricultural area is in the planning stages, as well as a community activity center; · Sports Field Upgrades - 20 fields in Bethel and School District 4J will be completed at a cost of $750,000, drainage and irrigation improvements have been completed at Roosevelt Middle School, Spencer Butte Middle School, and other Bethel and 4J School District sites; · Neighborhood Parks - 11 new parks or significant park renovations at a cost of $3,430,000: seven renovations of existing parks. Projects completed or underway include Laurel Hill Park, Irwin Park, Shadow Wood Park, Skyview Park and Walnut Grove Habitat Park. Other parks in progress through planning include Trainsong, Lark, Gilbert, and Gilham (non- POS); · Parkland Acquisition - actively pursing 12 neighborhood park sites and one community park site at a total cost of $5,350,000; completed acquisitions include Thompson Meadows, Rosetta Place, and Garden Way; · Ridgeline Expansion - 232 acres proposed at a cost of $3,720,000; will expand the trail system with additional acres from Moon Mountain to the Willow Creek area; Acquisitions to date include Bailey Hill Road, Gimpl Hill, Murray Hill, 52nd & Willamette trailhead, Dillard Road near Donald Street, and Amazon headwater site from Spencer Butte towards Mount Baldy (largest acquisition); · Success Stories of the POS bond include public participation, partnerships, and the development of diverse recreation facilities; · Diverse Recreation Facilities constructed or acquired through the POS include wildlife habitat, protected open space and trails, a variety of athletic facilities, alternative sports facilities such as skateboard parks, games that are art, and art that is a game. Ms. Riner noted that this project would contribute immensely to the future of the community and the environment. She thanked the City Council for its support on behalf of staff and the citizens of Eugene. Ms. Riner concluded that the report would be available to the public via the City's webpage. Mr. Meisner thanked Ms. Riner for an exemplary presentation. He asked staff to provide information at a later time as to what the current zoning was for the lands acquired and what the future effect would be for the buildable land inventory. MINUTES-Work Session City Council October 31, 2001 Page 2 Mr. Pap~ voiced his appreciation to Ms. Riner for her presentation and was pleased that the accomplishments went beyond what the bond had appropriated. He also commended the volunteer efforts, partnerships, and land donations. In response to a question from Mr. Pap~ regarding the Joint Use Committee, Ms. Riner replied that School District 4J met regularly with the City to address use issues. Ms. Nathanson spoke to the notable successes and opined that these successes were due to prudent financial moves and the generosity of many individuals and organizations. She pointed out that the park projects were creative and innovative. Ms. Nathanson cautioned that programming was an ongoing issue and complimented staff for its expedient resolution of difficulties as they arose. She said that the near-completion of acquisitions would bring the neighborhood parks projects to the forefront. Ms. Nathanson suggested that the council meet with the Budget Committee in the near future to determine the next focus. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the key to the success of this project was a combination of addressing athletics, parks, open space, and pools. He spoke to a future bond measure, pointing out there were still needs to be met and concurred that the council should meet with the Budget Committee on this issue with Ms. Nathanson leading the way. Mr. Kelly spoke about the metropolitan open space and hoped that a future measure could dovetail with that project. Ms. Taylor opined that three additional pools were needed throughout the community. She stated she was pleased that the acquisitions extended the Ridgeline Trail and parts of the Amazon headwaters but pointed out that integral portions of the Amazon headwaters were in danger of development and she hoped that the City would move forward expeditiously to acquire those portions. Ms. Taylor stated she was in favor of moving forward with the next bond measure and integrating it with the metropolitan open space project. She concluded with a compliment on Ms. Riner's presentation. Mr. Fart spoke to the major accomplishments that had been realized through the efforts of many factions. He pointed out that the Bethel/Danebo area of Eugene had benefitted immensely from the bond measure, specifically mentioning the Meadow View Sports Complex and Irwin Park. Mayor Torrey suggested that a broadcast organization be approached to undertake a professional production of the report for presentation to the community. B. WORK SESSION: An Ordinance Concerning Assessment Procedures; Amending Sections 7.010, 7.100, 7.125, 7.130, 7.150, 7.160, 7.175, 7.250, 7.295, 7.299, 7.400, 7.405, 7.407, 7.410, 7.420 and 7.425 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and providing an effective date Mr. McVey thanked councilors Kelly and Papd for their efforts as members of the Council Ad Hoc Committee of Street Improvement Funding. He additionally recognized City Engineer Les Lyle, posthumously, for his integral role in this effort. Mr. McVey said the focus of this project was to improve the fairness and equity of assessment policy and to complete work on the local street and alley assessment policies. He explained that it was the purpose of the City to build on the foundation of the Arterial Collector Street Assessment Policy. Mr. McVey referred to the Agenda Item Summary and reviewed the following assessment policy technical recommendations: MINUTES-Work Session City Council October 31, 2001 Page 3 · No reduction in assessable paving width associated with a "livability factor" · No imposition of "prepaid" equivalent assessments · Foregoing the use of irrevocable petitions on local streets Mr. McVey reviewed the following recommendations of criteria for council initiation of local street improvement projects: · Use of a criterion for effect on Fire/Emergency Medical Services response time along primary response routes · Application of the criteria for Berntzen Road Mr. McVey noted that the proportion recommended by staff for greater City participation in costs related to the fire Station was approximately four times the amount of a single-family residence, based on the trip generation rate. Mr. McVey reviewed the recommendations for modification to the Alley Assessment Policy and priority for establishing an Alley Improvement Program: · Basing apportionment of assessments on current land use rather than zoning · Priority for and timing of establishing an Alley Improvement Program Mr. McVey stated that the rationale for these recommendations were outlined in Attachment A and comparisons of existing local street assessment policies to the adopted Arterial/Collector Street Assessment Policy and the proposed Local Street Assessment Policy were outlined in Attachment B. Mr. McVey noted that the some City participation would be necessary for such programs to be successful. He conceded that there was not an identified funding source to pay for such participation. Mr. Kelly thanked Mr. McVey for an exemplary effort. As a member of the committee, he explained that many of the recommendations were of a housekeeping nature; additionally, he said that when the council adopted the Arterial/Collector Street Assessment Policy, language specific to arterials and collectors was included in the code. He said that this ordinance would delete such language from the "arterial collector only" portion of the code and include it in the "common portion" of the code. Mr. Kelly urged the council to approve the motion to move the ordinance forward to a public hearing. Mr. Kelly conceded that the ordinance was not perfect but that it would significantly improve the code. Mr. Pap8 thanked Mr. McVey for his efforts and concurred with Mr. Kelly that this request was a positive step to align the local streets and alleys with the Arterial/Collector Street Assessment Policy. Mr. Farr spoke of Berntzen Road and stated that the residents in that area believed the degradation of the road was due to the fire station. He questioned if the City paying four times the regular rate of the trip generation would meet with approval of the residents and said he believed that some negotiation would need to take place. Ms. Nathanson questioned how the ratio for trip generation was derived. Mr. McVey replied that the ratio came about from a review of the average daily trips generated by a single-family residence versus a count of the trips to the fire station, with no additional correction for vehicle MINUTES-Work Session City Council October 31, 2001 Page 4 weight. He added, however, that the proposed policy included a factor for extra depth of asphalt which may apply to the fire station. Ms. Nathanson referred to staff's recommendation of no imposition of "prepaid" equivalent assessments. She pointed out there could be a lengthy time period between prepayment for improvement and the actual construction and voiced her concern that this lag could lead to difficulties when home-ownership changed and a future homeowner did not understand his or her residence was on a private or a public street not built to standard. Mr. Kelly explained that it was a fairness and (potentially) legal issue to state that as a condition to build a single-family house on an improved street, the homeowner would be required to pay the current rate to improve the street even though it may not be improved for many years. He conceded that it was a delicate balance as he struggled with that issue but that he did not want the use of irrevocable petitions to be restored. Mr. Meisner thanked the committee members for their efforts in the challenge of resolving needs and equity. He stated he would support the suggested motion and commented he was pleased that the issue of alleys were addressed as there were substantial concerns, especially in the east Blair area of the Whiteaker neighborhood. He said that this area was zoned for upgrade and redevelopment but filled with single-family homes and alley apartment complexes. Mr. Meisner suggested that if a petition was presented to improve an alley and there was an application pending for a development use, zoning may be inconsistent. He emphasized that an alley improvement program was essential. Ms. Bettman stated she would support moving the recommendations forward to a public hearing; however, she said she could not support all of the recommendations. She specifically stated she could not support no reduction in assessable paving width associated with a 'fivability factor"as she believed the City was using local streets as arterials and collectors in many situations and pointed to the equity issue of a resident on a local street paying for additional pavement. Ms. Bettman encouraged staff to find a way to reach out to affected property owners and provide information on the impact of the policy so that these owners could understand the costs involved at the end of the process. She also suggested that future liability for street improvements be flagged in real estate transactions. Ms. Bettman raised the issue of the timeline and pointed out that if the council moved forward to adopt a local street program, the timeline would be compressed to do more projects. She also spoke to the new revenue sources and questioned what the City's liability would be and whether it would be appropriated from the Transportation Utility Fee. Mr. Kelly remarked that there was no interest on the part of the council, prior to Ms. Bettman's term, to improve all the local streets - over and above the timeline due - and assessing a large amount of property owners against their will. Ms. Taylor referred to the Street Assessment Policy and stated that it was unjust. She questioned how a homeowner would benefit from the adoption of the ordinance. Mr. McVey responded that specific changes to the proportionment of assessments provided some benefits for current homeowners as (1) single-family properties with more than 100 feet of frontage would have their assessable frontage capped at 100 feet, and, (2) some of the over half-acre lots that had an existing homestead would only pay for the actual frontage or a limit of 100 feet with an equivalent assessment collected at the time of future development. Ms. Taylor pointed out that these examples would not apply to typical homeowners. Mr. McVey pointed out there were programs for Iow-income families to defer or subsidize an assessment. Ms. Taylor asked about the assessment on Onyx Street and pointed out that those residents would be assessed $25,000 if the street was improved. Mr. McVey said a poll was underway to determine if there was support by a majority of the residents to move forward with that improvement. He explained that MINUTES-Work Session City Council October 31, 2001 Page 5 Onyx Street was classified a substandard street. Ms. Taylor suggested that a massive public education effort should ensue prior to a public hearing. Mr. Johnson stated that the public hearing was scheduled for November 13. Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Mr. Farr, to approve the recommendations proposed by the Council Ad Hoc Committee on Street Improvement Funding, and move forth with the ordinance adoption process. Mr. Rayor stated he would support the motion as he was in favor of no imposition of "prepaid" equivalent assessments and foregoing the use of irrevocable petitions on local streets. He explained that if a homeowner purchased a home on a gravel street and in the future the street was improved, the homeowner should be aware that he/she may be assessed, as residents on improved streets had already paid. Mr. Rayor said it would be confusing to label whether a home was "prepaid" or not and opined that the best solution was to pay as the improvement occurred. He complimented staff and the members of the committee for their efforts regarding this issue. In response to Ms. Taylor's concerns, Mr. Kelly stated that the changes in the ordinance only affected local street improvements and would only ensue if more than 50 percent of property owners were in favor of such improvements. He also opined there was not a need for an expansive educational process regarding this ordinance as the changes were "appendixes" to the Arterial/Collector Street Assessment policy. Ms. Nathanson spoke of her past suggestion that the City work in collaboration with State agencies to review State law and/or adoptive practices to ensure assessment issues. She requested that the City move forward with such collaboration so that residents would have a greater understanding of the process. Ms. Bettman stated once again that she would support the motion to move the process forward to a public hearing; however, she reiterated she could not support all the recommendations. She explained there were 48 miles of existing substandard local streets and did not believe the short timeline could possibly notify all the residents that could be affected by a potential liability. In reference to Mr. Kelly's comments, Ms. Bettman opined that improvements would not require support from 50 percent of property owners residing on a street; rather 50 percent majority support from the property owners based on the amount to be assessed would be required. Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Ms. Bettman, to amend the motion to extend the public hearing to February, 2002. The amendment failed 6:2, with councilors Taylor and Bettman in favor. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 1:32 p.m. (Recorded by Joyce Ogden) MINUTES-Work Session City Council October 31, 2001 Page 6